HentMas said:OH! but that´s the thing!!!, thats the "BEFORE" Disney, the one that actually treated kids and children like PEOPLE, the NOW Disney is actually more concerned of "what would the parent say??" and have a whole censorship board before them, just so they dont "Traumatize" the kids with movies like (what do you guess??) BAMBI.gaming Outlaw said:My god people,don't just take his word for it.yahzee is just....yahzee,not the first person
to come to for buying advice.It's funny that even though he knows the market in games has
stagnated he doesn't speak a word of a game like this being a new, fresh,risk taker.And
thats what it is,even if mickey didn't try to kill him self,which must be the only way
a game can be edgy.
On a side note let me remind you that Disney have(whether you know it or not)
always been the edgiest guys around.Bambi's mother gets shot at the beginning of the
movie and no one has a mom,that edgy stuff.(they just don't want you to think of it that way)
Disney WAS edgy and interesting and made you think, but in this world where the people cry in one voice "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" they have to play it safe.
Actually, Disney has never been as simple as either viewpoint would indicate: whether referring to the company, the creator or the content, there's always been several aspects to consider.Casual Shinji said:They should make a game around one of those old WW2 cartoons, where Donald Duck takes on Hitler. Now that would be epic.
Unfortunately, the good old days of controversial Disney are long gone.
Yes, Bambi is one of the most complex films that Disney made during that entire era. This is true both on an emotional and storytelling level as well as on a technical/production one. If your curious on that point, you can search the web for information on the complex camera system that was used to film multiple layers with correct perspective on that project (the most complex that was for any traditional animation project in the studio's history). At the same time, Bambi can't tell the story of Disney's narrative of approach in that era on it's own.
Another aspect is the way that Disney adapted existing fairy tales. I can remember (as I'd wager others would) hearing the original versions of some these tales later on, after I'd originally seen the Disney movie. It was not uncommon for certain grim elements of the tales to be omitted, and this was in the early days of their feature length pictures.
So if we examine the early Disney films we see dual forces: a desire to tell complex original stories and innovate technology in order to serve the storytelling and concurrently the adaptation of existing stories to create something more "kid friendly" or "family friendly". In other words, both controversial and conservative forces incorporated in the same entity in its defining era.
If the company was so difficult to pin down at the time it originally sculpted its identity, how we can we now look back at one aspect at and choose it as the "defining aspect"? That's before we even take into account the inherent complexity of reconciling all those aspects with how the company has involved over time or the face of a company branded with a family name juxtaposed against one that no longer employs a member of that same family.
While there may be easy answers in some Disney films, there never have been when looking at the company as a whole.